From: tgpedersen
Message: 63433
Date: 2009-02-26
>Now, now, I do that all the time.
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > > I was wondering if the different outcomes of Engl. -ough was
> > > caused by them being different from the beginning, thus
> > > -ough /-oUx/ > /-of/ and
> > > -ough /-oUG/ > /-oU/
> > >
> > >
> > > Torsten
> > >
> >
> > That's what I would think too, but the evidence doesn't present a
> > clear-cut pattern:
> >
> > <enough> [inVf] from OE <genog> [jeno:x] or [j@...:x] with final
> > /-x/, inflected <genoge> [jeno:Ge] or [j@...:G@] etc. > <enow>
> > [inaU] archaic
> > plural of <enough>, also = <enough>
> > <tough> [tVf] from OE <toh> [to:x] with final /-x/
> > <rough> [rVf] from OE <ruh> [ru:x] with final /-x/
> > <cough> [kAf],[kOf] from OE *<cohhian> with /xx/
> > <trough> [trAf], [trOf] from OE *trog [trOx] with final /-x/
> > <laugh> [læf] from OE <hlæhhan> with /xx/
> >
> > BUT
> > <though> [DoU] from Scand. *To:x, *Tox, with final /-x/
> > <dough> [doU] from OE <dag> [dA:x] with final /-x/
> > <bough> [baU] from OE <boh> [bo:x] with final /-x/
> > <slough> [slaU] from OE <sloh> [slo:x] with final /-x/
> > <plough> [plaU] from late OE <ploh> [plo:x] with final /-x/
>
>
> Oh the shame! I wrote <boh> instead of <bog> and <ploh> instead of
> <plog>, basing them on alternative but etymologically wrong
> spellings.
> With this in mind perhaps there's a tendency for words ending inDEO says Da. dog, Sw. dock are loans from MLG doch, which around 1400
> *-g to develop diphthongs while those ending in *-h develop [-f];
> *trog and *þoh/þo:h (Toh/To:h) are exceptions. Cybalist members
> will have noticed these mistakes and corrected them before this
> message gets posted.